A question about making theories of time
- Thread starter water
- Start date
greywolf said:
As far as you know.
That's a fine question. What kind of units do you think we can assign to "happiness" or your "sense of self"?
In terms of "energy" as far as is understood, we are a bunch of biochemical stuff. Energy can be exhausted? Or is that power? I always get messed up on that. I think heat is energy, and heat can "die" (entropy). The energy dissipated into whatever work it performs. When the work is done, the energy is gone to entropy. Something like that.
15ofthe19 said:
Well, technically it can't be done if you can get data. There are no units to encompass "a soul" since there is no current means to directly detect that "energy".
One might hypthesize in a number of ways, but it's all moot really I guess, as there is no evidence that currently be quantified. Perhaps in years to come that will change.
greywolf said:
key in on the word inert uniformity.
bland nothingness of no feature.
heat dies when work is performed and the energy cannot be recovered.
it's thermodynamics. if you take a perfectly insulated hypothetical ball (this is thought of as a "closed system") with a thin membrane inside of it.. on one side of the membrane, hot air.. on the other side.. cold air. poke a hole it the membrane. newton's doodad for thermal equilibrium will show you how long it will take until they become equal. so the hot and cold (the difference forming potential energy) mix due to the difference in their temperature (energy). This is because they are "out of balance". A bunch of hot next to a bunch of cold, with nothing to stop them from mixing? They mix because the cold is lacking energy, the warm has extra energy... so the cold takes enough of the warm until they are equal. Once they fully mix, they become inert and featureless. As long as the system remains insulated, there can be no work in the system, as there is no energy left, as it was all expended reaching equilibrium.
Entropy = Heat death
Now consider... is the universe a closed system?
Last edited:
i dont think so considering the whole no bounaries thing but if it were would it be possible to even reach this equilibrium do to the fact that were're expanding or does it not mater because all that would mater would be the membrane within reaching its equilibrium?
I'd say whatever I'd define as the universe, or megaverse, or whatever... in the classical sense i'd say it has to be a closed system, because it includes everything. If it includes everything, there can't be other stuff, so it's a closed system - regardless of how it seems from inside it.
This is theoritical. In reality though, time cannot be stopped. But I'm playing a game of "what if" right now, what if time was stopped? Well then, where is the transition from the future to the past? Time is now at a stand still, a natural time stream could be expressed as so
0------------------X--------------->
If time were to stop, the future would be given a beginning point and the past would become a segment:
0------------------0X0-------------->
With X representing the present. At this point, there is no more interaction between the past and the future since, only when the past and future meet is there time, perception and the present. At this point the present is gone and along with that comes the eventual disperse of the future:
0------------------0 0--------------->
0------------------0 0~~~~~~~~>
0------------------0 0|||||||>
0------------------0 ??????
All that would be left is the past. But, you have raised an interesting question. What happens when the future is gone? Saying that time travel is possible it would have to mean that there is a past to be able to go back to, so what happens to this past after the present disperses? It continues on
0------------------0
But once it reaches the point of a time freeze, history will repeat. An infinite loop I suppose.
Through this process though, perception is lost since the interaction has stopped, there would no longer be a focal point since that is what time is. For time to stop we would have to get rid of the focal point, seperate the past from the future. And then the loop would begin.
So if that reference frame is distrupted then so would time. This doesn't follow. If this was true then doesn't everyone have the ability to manipulate time as they would want? Some could slow it down if they wanted or quicken it, each doing what they wanted to time. This would throw everything out of whack, I don't think natural law is that chaotic.
your idea seems a little off to me.
o---------x--------->
if time were to stop i see how the past would be segmented but wouldnt that segmen include the "present" being frozen in time as well?
o---------xo
and how would the future have a beging when there is no continuation from present to future?
o---------xo ??????????
after this point is were i agree on the time loope seeing as there would be no future to go to.
o---------xo
what do u think?
o---------x--------->
if time were to stop i see how the past would be segmented but wouldnt that segmen include the "present" being frozen in time as well?
o---------xo
and how would the future have a beging when there is no continuation from present to future?
o---------xo ??????????
after this point is were i agree on the time loope seeing as there would be no future to go to.
o---------xo
what do u think?